The positions and sizes of such widgets are usually hardcoded constants, so that increasing the screen resolution merely widens the gaps between them. These values would be difficult to understand once the screen resolution they were based on for almost 20 years was no longer available.

It would be harder to ensure that the GUI still works as intended.
For example, overlapping or in other ways misaligned widgets are much easier to spot on the small screen.

this constraint can help to ensure a simple, elegant user interface that is not cluttered with useless information. Designs which require more screen space are probably not well thought out.

it is very useful to me in development. Precisely because of its small size, I can fit a Warzone 2100 window alongside a terminal into a single screen. Even comparing two game versions in neighbouring windows is possible in a 720p screen (this is not only great to test graphics, but also networking). The compact screenshots that result from the current minimum resolution are also easy to work with.

I do not understand why it was possible to release 3.2.3 with a large number of known bugs, but you can not assign a new release on the last master?

I have not met with problems in the Master which are not in 3.2.3.

You offer me to actually fork the game.
This will lead to an even greater separation of players by version.
I think this is a bad idea. We already lose online due to the separation of players by version. Beginners leave the game because of bugs and lack of opponents. The newbie will not install the 3.1.5 version ...

1024x600 - perfect default resolution. The height is not important for widgets

The default resolution should work for most users.
According to statistics from GlobalStats, the current default resolution of 1024x768 pixels is used by roughly 3% of desktop users, whereas the resolution you suggest is not among the 10 most common ones (and has never been since data were collected from 2009 onward). Why should it be adopted then?

1024x600 - perfect default resolution. The height is not important for widgets

The default resolution should work for most users.
According to statistics from GlobalStats, the current default resolution of 1024x768 pixels is used by roughly 3% of desktop users, whereas the resolution you suggest is not among the 10 most common ones (and has never been since data were collected from 2009 onward). Why should it be adopted then?

1024x600 - perfect default resolution. The height is not important for widgets

The default resolution should work for most users.
According to statistics from GlobalStats, the current default resolution of 1024x768 pixels is used by roughly 3% of desktop users, whereas the resolution you suggest is not among the 10 most common ones (and has never been since data were collected from 2009 onward). Why should it be adopted then?